JHEP12(2010)060
Published for SISSA by SpringerReceived: October 13, 2010 Accepted: November 24, 2010 Published: December 14, 2010
Measurement of the W → `ν and Z/γ
∗
→ ``
production cross sections in proton-proton collisions at
√
s = 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector
The ATLAS Collaboration
1Abstract: First measurements of the W → `ν and Z/γ
∗→ `` (` = e, µ) production
cross sections in proton-proton collisions at
√
s = 7 TeV are presented using data recorded
by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The results are based on 2250 W → `ν and
179 Z/γ
∗→ `` candidate events selected from a data set corresponding to an integrated
luminosity of approximately 320 nb
−1. The measured total W and Z/γ
∗-boson production
cross sections times the respective leptonic branching ratios for the combined electron and
muon channels are σ
Wtot· BR(W → `ν) = 9.96 ± 0.23(stat) ± 0.50(syst) ± 1.10(lumi) nb
and σ
Z/γtot ∗· BR(Z/γ
∗→ ``) = 0.82 ± 0.06 (stat) ± 0.05 (syst) ± 0.09 (lumi) nb (within the
invariant mass window 66 < m
``< 116 GeV). The W/Z cross-section ratio is measured to
be 11.7 ± 0.9(stat) ± 0.4(syst). In addition, measurements of the W
+and W
−production
cross sections and of the lepton charge asymmetry are reported. Theoretical predictions
based on NNLO QCD calculations are found to agree with the measurements.
Keywords: Hadron-Hadron Scattering
ArXiv ePrint:
1010.2130
JHEP12(2010)060
Contents
1
Introduction
2
2
The ATLAS detector
3
3
Data and Monte-Carlo samples
4
4
Reconstruction of electrons, muons and missing transverse energy
6
4.1
Track reconstruction in the inner detector
6
4.2
Electrons
7
4.3
Muons
8
4.4
Missing transverse energy
10
5
Selection of W → `ν and Z → `` candidates
11
5.1
Event selection
11
5.2
Selection of high transverse-energy leptons
11
5.3
Lepton isolation
13
5.4
Kinematic selection
13
5.5
W and Z candidates after final selection
14
6
W and Z boson signals and backgrounds
19
6.1
Background estimate for the W → eν channel
19
6.2
Background estimate for the W → µν channel
20
6.3
Background estimate for the Z → ee channel
21
6.4
Background estimate for the Z → µµ channel
22
6.5
Background-subtracted W and Z candidate events
22
7
Cross-section measurements
24
7.1
Methodology
24
7.2
The correction factors C
Wand C
Z25
7.2.1
Electron final states
25
7.2.2
Muon final states
26
7.2.3
C
Wand C
Zand their uncertainties
27
7.3
Measured fiducial cross sections
28
7.4
Acceptances and uncertainties
30
7.5
Measured total cross sections
31
7.6
Comparison to theoretical calculations
32
7.7
The ratio of the W to Z cross sections
34
8
Measurement of the W → `ν charge asymmetry
36
9
Summary
39
JHEP12(2010)060
1
Introduction
Measurements of the inclusive production cross sections of the W and Z bosons at hadron
colliders constitute an important test of the Standard Model. The theoretical calculations
involve parton distribution functions (PDF) and different couplings of the partons to the
weak bosons. They are affected by significant higher-order QCD corrections. Calculations
of the inclusive W and Z production cross sections have been carried out at next-to-leading
order (NLO) [
1
–
3
] and next-to-next-to leading order (NNLO) in perturbation theory [
4
–
9
].
The production of W and Z bosons at hadron colliders was measured previously by
the UA1 [
10
] and UA2 [
11
] experiments at
√
s = 0.63 TeV at the CERN Sp¯
pS and by
the CDF [
12
–
14
] and D0 [
15
–
17
] experiments at
√
s = 1.8 TeV and
√
s = 1.96 TeV at the
Fermilab Tevatron proton-antiproton colliders. In contrast to proton-antiproton collisions,
the cross sections for W
+and W
−production are expected to be different in proton-proton
collisions due to different valence quark distributions of the u and d quarks. Most recently,
the RHIC collider experiments [
18
,
19
] have reported the first observation of W production
in proton-proton collisions at
√
s = 0.5 TeV.
W and Z bosons are expected to be produced abundantly at the Large Hadron Collider
(LHC) [
20
]. The projected large dataset and the high LHC energy will allow for detailed
measurements of their production properties in a previously unexplored kinematic domain.
These conditions, together with the proton-proton nature of the collisions, will provide
new constraints on the parton distribution functions and will allow for precise tests of
perturbative QCD. Besides the measurements of the W and Z boson production cross
sections, the measurement of their ratio R and of the asymmetry between the W
+and
W
−cross sections constitute important tests of the Standard Model. The ratio R can
be measured with a higher relative precision because both experimental and theoretical
uncertainties partially cancel. With larger data sets this ratio can be used to provide
constraints on the W -boson width Γ
W[
14
].
This paper describes the first measurement of the W
+, W
−and Z/γ
∗boson production
cross sections in proton-proton collisions at
√
s = 7 TeV by the ATLAS [
21
] experiment at
the LHC. The measurements are based on data corresponding to an integrated
luminos-ity of approximately 320 nb
−1. The inclusive Z/γ
∗-production-cross section is measured
within the mass range 66 < m
``< 116 GeV. In addition to the individual cross-section
measurements, first measurements of the ratio R of the W to Z cross sections and of the
W → `ν charge asymmetry are presented. Throughout this paper the label “Z” refers
to Z/γ
∗.
The paper is organized as follows: after a short description of the ATLAS detector, the
data set and the Monte-Carlo samples in sections 2 and 3, the identification of electrons,
muons and the measurement of the transverse missing energy are discussed in section 4.
In section 5, the selection of W → `ν and Z → `` candidates is presented. Section 6 is
devoted to a detailed discussion of backgrounds in these samples. The measurement of the
W → `ν and Z → `` cross sections and of their ratio is presented in section 7 together
with a comparison to theoretical predictions. The measurement of the W → `ν charge
asymmetry is discussed in section 8.
JHEP12(2010)060
2
The ATLAS detector
The ATLAS detector [
21
] at the LHC comprises a thin superconducting solenoid
surround-ing the inner-detector and three large superconductsurround-ing toroids arranged with an eight-fold
azimuthal coil symmetry placed around the calorimeters, forming the basis of the muon
spectrometer.
The Inner-Detector (ID) system is immersed in a 2 T axial magnetic field and
pro-vides tracking information for charged particles in a pseudorapidity range matched by the
precision measurements of the electromagnetic calorimeter; the silicon tracking detectors,
pixel and silicon microstrip (SCT), cover the pseudorapidity range |η| < 2.5.
1The highest
granularity is achieved around the vertex region using the pixel detectors. The Transition
Radiation Tracker (TRT), which surrounds the silicon detectors, enables track-following up
to |η| = 2.0. Electron identification information is provided by the detection of transition
radiation in the TRT straw tubes.
The calorimeter system covers the pseudorapidity range |η| < 4.9. It is based on
two different detector technologies, with liquid argon (LAr) and scintillator-tiles as active
media. The electromagnetic (EM) calorimeter, consisting of lead absorbers and liquid argon
as the active material, is divided into one barrel (|η| < 1.475) and two end-cap components
(1.375 < |η| < 3.2). It uses an accordion geometry to ensure fast and uniform response.
It has a fine segmentation in both the lateral and longitudinal directions of the particle
showers. At high energy, most of the EM shower energy is collected in the second layer
which has a lateral cell granularity of ∆η ×∆φ = 0.025 × 0.025. The first layer is segmented
into eight strips per cell in the η direction which extend over four cells in φ. A third layer
measures the tails of very high energy EM showers and helps in rejecting hadron showers.
In the region |η| < 1.8, a presampler detector consisting of a thin layer of LAr is used to
correct for the energy lost by electrons, positrons, and photons upstream of the calorimeter.
The hadronic tile calorimeter is placed directly outside the EM calorimeter envelope. This
steel/scintillating-tile detector consists of a barrel covering the region |η| < 1.0, and two
extended barrels in the range 0.8 < |η| < 1.7. The copper Hadronic End-cap Calorimeter
(HEC), which uses LAr as active material, consists of two independent wheels per
end-cap (1.5 < |η| < 3.2), located directly behind the end-end-cap electromagnetic calorimeter.
The Forward Calorimeter (FCal), which also uses LAr as the active material, consists of
three modules in each end-cap: the first, made of copper, is optimised for electromagnetic
measurements, while the other two, made of tungsten, measure primarily the energy of
hadronic interactions [
22
].
Muon detection is based on the magnetic deflection of muon tracks in the large
super-conducting air-core toroid magnets, instrumented with separate trigger and high-precision
tracking chambers. A system of three toroids, a barrel and two end-caps, generates the
1
The nominal interaction point is defined as the origin of the coordinate system, while the anti-clockwise beam direction defines the z-axis and the x − y plane is transverse to the beam direction. The positive x-axis is defined as pointing from the interaction point to the centre of the LHC ring and the positive y-axis is defined as pointing upwards. The azimuthal angle φ is measured around the beam axis and the polar angle θ is the angle from the beam axis. The pseudorapidity is defined as η = − ln tan(θ/2). The distance ∆R in the η − φ space is defined as ∆R =p(∆η)2+ (∆φ)2.
JHEP12(2010)060
magnetic field for the muon spectrometer in the pseudorapidity range |η| < 2.7. Over
most of the η-range, a precision measurement of the track coordinates in the principal
bending direction of the magnetic field is provided by Monitored Drift Tubes (MDTs). At
large pseudorapidities, Cathode Strip Chambers (CSCs) with higher granularity are used
in the innermost plane (station) over 2.0 < |η| < 2.7, to withstand the demanding rate and
background conditions expected with the LHC operation at the nominal luminosity. The
muon trigger system, which covers the pseudorapidity range |η| < 2.4, consists of Resistive
Plate Chambers (RPCs) in the barrel (|η| < 1.05) and Thin Gap Chambers (TGCs) in the
end-cap regions (1.05 < |η| < 2.4), with a small overlap in the |η| =1.05 region.
The first-level (L1) trigger system uses a subset of the total detector information to
make a decision on whether or not to record each event, reducing the data rate to a
design value of approximately 75 kHz. Details about the L1 calorimeter and muon trigger
systems used in the W and Z analyses are provided in section
3
. The subsequent two levels,
collectively known as the high-level trigger, are the Level-2 (L2) trigger and the event filter.
They provide the reduction to a final data-taking rate designed to be approximately 200 Hz.
3
Data and Monte-Carlo samples
The data were collected over a four-month period, from March to July 2010. Application
of basic beam, detector, and data-quality requirements resulted in total integrated
lumi-nosities of 315 nb
−1for the W → eν, 310 nb
−1for the W → µν, 316 nb
−1for the Z → ee,
and 331 nb
−1for the Z → µµ channels. The absolute luminosity was calibrated using
beam separation scans [
23
], yielding a total systematic uncertainty of ±11%, dominated
by the measurement of the LHC beam currents. Details on the methods and measurement
results obtained with several detectors in ATLAS can be found in ref. [
24
].
Events in this analysis are selected using only the hardware-based L1 trigger, i.e.
without use of the high-level trigger. The L1 calorimeter trigger selects photon and electron
candidates within |η| < 2.5 using calorimeter information in trigger towers of dimension
∆η × ∆φ = 0.1 × 0.1.
The calorimeter trigger used in this analysis accepts electron
and photon candidates if the transverse energy from a cluster of trigger towers is above
approximately 10 GeV. The L1 muon trigger searches for patterns of hits within |η| < 2.4
consistent with high-p
Tmuons originating from the interaction region. The algorithm
requires a coincidence of hits in the different trigger stations along a road which follows
the path of a muon from the interaction point through the detector. The width of the
road is related to the p
Tthreshold to be applied. The muon trigger used in this analysis
corresponds to a threshold of approximately 6 GeV. As a result of these trigger decisions,
a total of 6.5 × 10
6and 5.1 × 10
6events are triggered in the electron and muon channels,
respectively.
In order to compare the data with theoretical expectations and to estimate the
back-grounds from various physics processes, Monte-Carlo simulations were performed. For the
W and Z signal processes, dedicated W → `ν and Z → `` signal samples were generated.
For the backgrounds the following processes were considered:
JHEP12(2010)060
• W → τ ν: this process is expected to contribute, in particular via leptonic tau decays,
τ → `νν, to both electron and muon final states in the W analysis.
• Z → ``: Z → µµ decays with one muon outside of the muon-spectrometer acceptance
generate apparent missing transverse energy and constitute an important background
in the W → µν analysis. Due to the larger η coverage of the calorimeter system, this
effect is less severe for the corresponding Z → ee decays in the W → eν analysis.
• Z → τ τ : these decays contribute a smaller background than W → τ ν and Z → ``
decays to the W analysis. For the Z analysis, they are more important than the two
aforementioned backgrounds.
• t¯
t production: the production of top pairs constitutes an additional background to
both the W and Z analyses. The relative size, compared to the backgrounds from
W and Z decays, depends on the channel considered.
• Jet production via QCD processes: the production of jets via QCD processes (referred
to as “QCD background” in the following) is another important background
contri-bution. It has significant components from semi-leptonic decays of heavy quarks,
hadrons misidentified as leptons and, in the case of the electron channel, electrons
from conversions. For the Z → µµ analysis, dedicated b¯
b and c¯
c samples were
gener-ated in addition, to increase the statistics for these background components.
An overview of all signal and background processes considered and of the generators
used for the simulation is given in table
1
. All signal and background samples were
gen-erated at
√
s = 7 TeV, then processed with the GEANT4 [
25
] simulation of the ATLAS
detector [
26
], reconstructed and passed through the same analysis chain as the data. For
the comparison to data, all cross sections, except the dijet cross section, are normalised to
the results of higher order QCD calculations (see table
1
). More details on the calculations
for the W and Z processes and on the assigned uncertainties are presented in section
7.6
.
For the t¯
t production cross section, an uncertainty of ±6% is assumed.
For the QCD background, no reliable prediction can be obtained from a leading
or-der Monte-Carlo simulation. For the comparisons of differential distributions to data, as
presented in section
5
, this background is normalised to data. However, for the final
cross-section measurement, except for the Z → µµ analysis, data-driven methods are used to
determine the residual contributions of the QCD background to the final W and Z samples,
as discussed in section
6
.
During the period these data were recorded, the average pile-up varied from zero to
about two extra interactions per event, with most of the data being recorded with roughly
one extra interaction per event. To account for this, the W → `ν, Z → ``, and QCD-dijet
Monte-Carlo samples were generated with on average two extra primary interactions and
then weighted to the primary vertex multiplicity distribution observed in the data.
All data distributions in this paper are shown with statistical uncertainties only, based
on Poisson statistics [
27
], unless otherwise stated.
JHEP12(2010)060
Physics process Generator σ· BR [nb]
W → `ν (` = e, µ) PYTHIA [28] 10.46±0.52 NNLO [5,8,9]
W+→ `+ν 6.16±0.31 NNLO [5,8,9]
W−→ `−ν 4.30±0.21 NNLO [5,8,9]
Z/γ∗→ `` (m``> 60 GeV) PYTHIA 0.99±0.05 NNLO [5,8,9]
W → τ ν PYTHIA 10.46±0.52 NNLO [5,8,9]
W → τ ν → `ννν PYTHIA 3.68±0.18 NNLO [5,8,9]
Z/γ∗→ τ τ (m``> 60 GeV) PYTHIA 0.99±0.05 NNLO [5,8,9] t¯t MC@NLO [29,30], 0.16±0.01 NLO+NNLL [31–33]
POWHEG [34]
Dijet (e channel, ˆpT> 15 GeV) PYTHIA 1.2×106 LO [28] Dijet (µ channel, ˆpT> 8 GeV) PYTHIA 10.6×106 LO [28] bb (µ channel, ˆpT> 18 GeV, PYTHIA 73.9 LO [28]
pT(µ) > 15 GeV)
cc (µ channel, ˆpT> 18 GeV, PYTHIA 28.4 LO [28] pT(µ) > 15 GeV)
Table 1. Signal and background Monte-Carlo samples as well as the generators used in the sim-ulation. For each sample the production cross section, multiplied by the relevant branching ratios (BR), to which the samples were normalised is given. For the electroweak (W and Z boson pro-duction) and for the t¯t production, contributions from higher order QCD corrections are included. The inclusive QCD jet and heavy quark cross sections are given at leading order (LO). These sam-ples were generated with requirements on the transverse momentum of the partons involved in the hard-scattering process, ˆpT. No systematic uncertainties are assigned here for these cross sections, since methods are used to extract their normalisation and their systematic uncertainties from data (see text). All Monte-Carlo samples result in negligible statistical uncertainties, unless otherwise stated.
4
Reconstruction of electrons, muons and missing transverse energy
4.1
Track reconstruction in the inner detector
The reconstruction of both electrons and muons uses reconstructed charged tracks in the
inner detector. A detailed description of the track reconstruction has already been
pre-sented in ref. [
35
]. The inner tracking system measures charged particle tracks at all φ over
the pseudorapidity region |η| < 2.5 using the pixel, SCT and TRT detectors. Tracks are
reconstructed using a pattern recognition algorithm that starts with the silicon information
and adds hits in the TRT. This “inside-out” tracking procedure selects track candidates
with transverse momenta above 100 MeV [
36
]. One further pattern recognition step is then
run, which only looks at hits not previously used. It starts from the TRT and works inwards
adding silicon hits as it progresses. In this second step, tracks from secondary interactions,
such as photon conversions and long-lived hadron decays, with transverse momenta above
300 MeV are recovered.
JHEP12(2010)060
4.2
Electrons
The ATLAS standard electron reconstruction and identification algorithm [
37
] is designed
to provide various levels of background rejection for high identification efficiencies for
calorimeter transverse energy E
T> 20 GeV, over the full acceptance of the inner-detector
system. Electron reconstruction begins with a seed cluster of E
T> 2.5 GeV in the second
layer of the electromagnetic calorimeter. A matching track, extrapolated to the second EM
calorimeter layer, is searched for in a broad window of ∆η × ∆φ = 0.05 × 0.1 amongst all
reconstructed tracks with p
T> 0.5 GeV. The closest-matched track to the cluster
barycen-tre is kept as that belonging to the electron candidate.
The final electron candidates
have cluster sizes of ∆η × ∆φ = 0.075 × 0.175 in the barrel calorimeter and 0.125 × 0.125
in the end-cap. The transverse energy of these electron candidates is obtained from the
corresponding calorimeter clusters.
The electron identification selections are based on criteria using calorimeter and tracker
information and have been optimised in 10 bins in η and 11 bins in E
T. Three reference sets
of requirements (“loose”, “medium”, and “tight”) have been chosen, providing progressively
stronger jet rejection at the expense of some identification efficiency loss. Each set adds
additional constraints to the previous requirements:
• “Loose”: this basic selection uses EM shower shape information from the second
layer of the EM calorimeter (lateral shower containment and shower width) and
energy leakage into the hadronic calorimeters as discriminant variables. This set of
requirements provides high and uniform identification efficiency but a low background
rejection.
• “Medium”: this selection provides additional rejection against hadrons by evaluating
the energy deposit patterns in the first layer of the EM calorimeter (the shower width
and the ratio of the energy difference associated with the largest and second largest
energy deposit over the sum of these energies), track quality variables (number of
hits in the pixel and silicon trackers, transverse distance of closest approach to the
primary vertex (transverse impact parameter)) and a cluster-track matching variable
(∆η between the cluster and the track extrapolated to the first layer of the EM
calorimeter).
• “Tight”: this selection further rejects charged hadrons and secondary electrons from
conversions by fully exploiting the electron identification potential of the ATLAS
detector. It makes requirements on the ratio of cluster energy to track momentum,
on the number of hits in the TRT, and on the ratio of high-threshold hits
2to the total
number of hits in the TRT. Electrons from conversions are rejected by requiring at
least one hit in the first layer of the pixel detector. A conversion-flagging algorithm
is also used to further reduce this contribution. The impact-parameter requirement
applied in the medium selection is further tightened at this level.
2The TRT readout discriminates at two thresholds. The lower one is set to register minimum-ionizing particles and the higher one is intended for the detection of transition radiation.
JHEP12(2010)060
Z → ee and W → eν signal Monte-Carlo samples were used to estimate the medium
and tight electron identification efficiencies within the relevant kinematic and geometrical
acceptance (E
T> 20 GeV within the range |η| < 2.47 and excluding the transition region
between the barrel and end-cap calorimeters, 1.37 < |η| < 1.52). The efficiencies are
esti-mated to be 94.3% and 74.9% respectively, relative to the basic reconstruction efficiency
of 97% which requires a very loose matching between the candidate electron track and
the electromagnetic cluster. Using QCD dijet background Monte-Carlo samples, the
corre-sponding rejections against background from hadrons or conversion electrons in generated
jets with E
T> 20 GeV within the relevant kinematic and geometrical acceptance are found
to be 5700 and 77000, respectively.
Given the limited available statistics of Z → ee decays, the electron performance
can-not yet be evaluated in detail with collision data. The overall uncertainty on the electron
en-ergy scale is estimated to be ±3%, based on extrapolations from test-beam measurements.
The uncertainty on the electron energy resolution is also based on extrapolations from
test-beam measurements and has a negligible impact on the measurements reported here.
The material in front of the electromagnetic calorimeter affects the reconstruction and
identification efficiencies as well as the correct identification of the charge of the
recon-structed electron. This has been studied in detail with dedicated simulations including
additional material in the inner detector and in front of the electromagnetic calorimeter.
The amount of additional material which might be present is currently best constrained by
track efficiency measurements in minimum bias data [
35
] and studies of photon conversions.
The probability for wrongly identifying the charge of the electron depends strongly on the
amount of material it traverses in the inner detector and therefore on η. It is expected
to be (1.9 ± 0.3)% for the medium electron identification cuts (this affects the selection of
Z-boson candidates as discussed in section
6.3
) and (0.6 ± 0.3)% for the tight identification
cuts (this affects the measurement of the W -boson asymmetry as discussed in section
8
).
The most precise current estimate of the electron identification efficiencies is obtained
from a sample of W → eν candidates which were selected using tight cuts on the
miss-ing transverse energy and the topology of the event and requirmiss-ing only that an electron
candidate be reconstructed through the very loose match between a track and an
elec-tromagnetic cluster mentioned above.
The residual background from QCD dijets was
estimated using a calorimeter isolation technique similar to that described in section
6.1
.
The results obtained for the medium efficiency were 0.900 ± 0.014(stat) ± 0.040(syst)
com-pared to 0.943 from the Monte Carlo. For the tight efficiency, the corresponding results
were 0.742 ± 0.013(stat) ± 0.030(syst) compared to 0.749 from the Monte Carlo. These
measurements confirm that, within the current uncertainties, the electron identification
efficiencies are well modelled by the simulation and are used to evaluate the systematic
uncertainties discussed in section
7.2
.
4.3
Muons
The ATLAS muon identification and reconstruction algorithms take advantage of multiple
sub-detector technologies which provide complementary approaches and cover
pseudora-pidities up to 2.7 [
38
].
JHEP12(2010)060
The stand-alone muon reconstruction is based entirely on muon-spectrometer
informa-tion, independently of whether or not the muon-spectrometer track is also reconstructed
in the inner detector. The muon reconstruction is initiated locally in a muon chamber by a
search for straight line track segments in the bending plane. Hits in the precision chambers
are used and the segment candidates are required to point to the centre of ATLAS. When
available, the hit coordinate φ in the non-bending plane measured by the trigger detectors
is associated to the segment. Two or more track segments in different muon stations are
combined to form a muon track candidate using three-dimensional tracking in the
mag-netic field. The track parameters (p
T, η, φ, transverse and longitudinal distances of closest
approach to the primary vertex) obtained from the muon spectrometer track fit are
ex-trapolated to the interaction point taking into account both multiple scattering and energy
loss in the calorimeters. For the latter, the reconstruction utilises either a parameterisation
or actual measurements of calorimeter energy losses, together with a parameterisation of
energy loss in the inert material. The average muon energy loss in the calorimeters is
3 GeV. The stand-alone muon reconstruction algorithms use the least-squares formalism to
fit tracks in the muon spectrometer, with most material effects directly integrated into the
χ
2function.
The combined muon reconstruction associates a stand-alone muon-spectrometer track
to an inner-detector track. The association is performed using a χ
2-test, defined from the
difference between the respective track parameters weighted by their combined covariance
matrices. The parameters are evaluated at the point of closest approach to the beam axis.
The combined track parameters are derived either from a statistical combination of the two
tracks or from a refit of the full track. To validate the results presented in this paper, these
two independent reconstruction chains were exercised and good agreement was observed.
The results presented here are based on the statistical combination of muon-spectrometer
and inner-detector measurement.
Detailed studies of the muon performance in collision data were performed. The muon
momentum scale and resolution were extracted by fitting the invariant mass distribution
of the Z candidates described in section
5.4
to a Breit-Wigner function convolved with
a Gaussian function. The fitted mean value indicates that the muon-momentum scale
is within ±1% around the nominal value. From the fitted width the muon-momentum
resolution, for muons from Z decays, is extracted to be (4 ± 2)% in the barrel and (7 ± 3)%
in the end-cap regions. These results are consistent with those obtained from the single
muon studies reported in ref. [
39
].
Two complementary approaches were used to measure the muon reconstruction
effi-ciency in data. The first technique determines the effieffi-ciency of isolated combined muons
relative to inner-detector tracks matched to muon hits in the muon spectrometer, resulting
in an efficiency measured in data of 0.994 ± 0.006(stat) ± 0.024(syst), compared to 0.986
from the Monte-Carlo simulation. In the second approach, events are selected requiring an
isolated combined muon passing the same selection as for the Z analysis (see section
5.4
).
The second muon of the Z candidate is then selected as an inner-detector track with
op-posite charge. The invariant mass of the muon-track pair is required to be within 10 GeV
of the nominal Z mass. The combined muon efficiency, measured relative to this sample
JHEP12(2010)060
of tracks, is 0.933 ± 0.022(stat) ± 0.013(syst), while the value from Monte-Carlo
simu-lation is 0.924. The difference in the efficiency values obtained from the two methods is
due to the different sensitivity to the geometrical acceptance of the muon spectrometer,
as the first method explicitly requires muon hits. Both techniques confirm that the
recon-struction efficiency is well modelled by the simulation and the results are used to assign a
±2.5% systematic uncertainty on this efficiency.
4.4
Missing transverse energy
The transverse missing energy (E
missT
) reconstruction used in the electron channel is based
on calorimeter information. It relies on a cell-based algorithm which sums the
electromag-netic-scale energy deposits of calorimeter cells inside three-dimensional topological
clus-ters [
40
]. The EM scale corresponds to the energy deposited in the calorimeter calculated
under the assumption that all processes are purely electromagnetic in nature. These
clus-ters are then corrected to take into account the different response to hadrons than to
electrons or photons, dead material losses and out of cluster energy losses [
41
]. These
topological clusters are built around energy E > 4σ
noiseseeds, where σ
noiseis the Gaussian
width of the cell energy distribution in randomly triggered events, by iteratively gathering
neighbouring cells with E > 2σ
noiseand, in a final step, by adding all direct neighbours of
these accumulated secondary cells.
For the electron channel, the components of the missing transverse energy are
calcu-lated by summing over all topological cluster cell energy components E
x,yi:
E
x,ymiss|
e= −
X
i
E
x,yi.
(4.1)
The E
Tmissused in the muon channel is calculated by adding the reconstructed momenta
of isolated and non-isolated muons measured in the pseudorapidity range |η| < 2.7:
E
x,ymiss|
µ= −
X
iE
x,yi−
isolatedX
kp
kx,y−
non−isolatedX
jp
jx,y,
(4.2)
where non-isolated muons are those within a distance ∆R ≤ 0.3 of a jet in the event. The
p
Tof an isolated muon is determined from the combined measurement of the inner detector
and muon spectrometer, as explained in section
4.3
. The energy lost by an isolated muon
in the calorimeters is removed from the calorimeter term. For a non-isolated muon, the
energy lost in the calorimeter cannot be separated from the nearby jet energy. The
muon-spectrometer measurement of the muon momentum after energy loss in the calorimeter
is therefore used, unless there is a significant mismatch between the spectrometer and
combined measurements. In this case the combined measurement minus the parameterised
energy loss in the calorimeter is used. For values of the pseudorapidity outside the fiducial
volume of the inner detector (2.5 < |η| < 2.7), there is no matched track requirement and
the muon spectrometer stand-alone measurement is used instead.
JHEP12(2010)060
Systematic uncertainties on the measurement of E
Tmissresult mainly from uncertainties
on the energy scale of topological clusters. From a comparison of the momentum and energy
measurement of charged particles [
42
], the topological cluster energy scale is known to
±20% for p
T∼ 500 MeV and ±5% at high p
T. Other contributions result from uncertainties
due to the imperfect modelling of the overall E
Tmissresponse (low energy hadrons) and
resolution, modelling of the underlying event and pile-up effects.
5
Selection of W → `ν and Z → `` candidates
5.1
Event selection
Collision candidates are selected by requiring a primary vertex with at least three tracks,
consistent with the spot position. To reduce contamination from cosmic-ray or
beam-halo events, the muon analysis requires the primary vertex position along the beam axis to
be within 15 cm of the nominal position (this primary vertex distribution has a measured
longitudinal RMS of 6.2 cm).
An analysis of a high-statistics sample of minimum-bias events has shown that events
can occasionally contain very localised high-energy calorimeter deposits not originating
from the proton-proton collision, but e.g. from sporadic discharges in the hadronic end-cap
calorimeter or, more rarely, coherent noise in the electromagnetic calorimeter. Cosmic-ray
muons undergoing a hard bremsstrahlung are also a potential source of localised energy
deposits uncorrelated with the primary proton-proton collisions. The occurrence of these
events is very rare but can potentially impact significantly the E
Tmissmeasurement by
creating high-energy tails [
43
]. To remove such events, dedicated cleaning requirements
have been developed using a minimum-bias event sample. Using Monte-Carlo simulation,
it was verified that these criteria remove less than 0.1% of minimum-bias events, 0.004%
of W → `ν, and 0.01% of dijet events.
For the electron channel only, the event is rejected if the candidate electromagnetic
cluster is located in any problematic region of the EM calorimeter.
Due to hardware
problems [
22
], the signal cannot be read out from ∼2% of the EM calorimeter cells.
5.2
Selection of high transverse-energy leptons
Electron candidates selected with the identification level “tight” for the W analysis and
“medium” for the Z analysis (according to the algorithm described in section
4.2
) are
required to have a cluster E
T> 20 GeV within the range |η| < 2.47, excluding the transition
region between the barrel and end-cap calorimeters (1.37 < |η| < 1.52). Muon candidates
selected according to the algorithm described in section
4.3
are required to have a combined
muon with p
T> 20 GeV and a muon-spectrometer track with p
T> 10 GeV within the
range |η| < 2.4. To increase the robustness against track reconstruction mismatches, the
difference between the inner-detector and muon-spectrometer p
Tcorrected for the mean
energy loss in upstream material, is required to be less than 15 GeV. The difference between
the z position of the muon track extrapolated to the beam line and the z coordinate of the
primary vertex is required to be less than 1 cm, given that the RMS of this distribution in
data is 2 mm.
JHEP12(2010)060
[GeV] T E 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Entries / 5 GeV 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 6 10 [GeV] T E 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Entries / 5 GeV 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 6 10 ATLAS -1 L dt = 315 nb∫
= 7 TeV ) s Data 2010 ( ν e → W QCD ee → Z ν τ → W τ τ → Z t t (a) 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 6 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 6 10 [GeV] T p 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Entries / 5 GeV 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 6 10 Data 2010 (s = 7 TeV) ν µ → W QCD ν τ → W µ µ → Z τ τ → Z t t ATLAS -1 L dt = 310 nb∫
(b)Figure 1. Calorimeter cluster ET of “tight” electron candidates (a) and combined pT of muon candidates (b) for data and Monte-Carlo simulation, broken down into the signal and various back-ground components. The vertical line in (b) indicates the analysis cut. The transverse momentum region between 15 and 20 GeV of the muon sample is used in the estimation of the QCD background (see section6.2). The values of the integrated luminosities for the two channels have uncertainties of ±11%, see section3.
Figure
1
shows the E
Tand p
Tspectra of these “tight” electron and combined muon
candidates and compares these to the signal and background Monte-Carlo samples
de-scribed in section
3
. Comparisons of the dijet Monte-Carlo distributions to equivalent
data distributions have shown that the dijet Monte Carlo for this high-p
Tlepton selection
over-estimates the amount of background by a factor of approximately 2.4 for the electron
channel and a factor of 1.6 for the muon channel. The difference between these values is
likely explained by the different composition of the QCD background in the two analyses.
For the electron case, this normalisation factor is obtained by comparing data and
Monte-Carlo samples of high transverse-momentum electron candidates which are dominated by
QCD background (candidates satisfying the “loose” electron selection as defined in
sec-tion
4.2
). For the muon case, this normalisation factor is obtained from the comparison
of a control sample of mostly QCD background events, obtained by reversing the
isola-tion requirement (as defined in secisola-tion
5.3
) on muons passing the transverse-momentum
selection, with the corresponding Monte-Carlo samples.
Unless otherwise stated, all Monte-Carlo distributions shown in this paper have been
normalised to the integrated luminosity of the data as described in section
3
, using the
cross sections as given in table
1
and taking into account these scale factors for the QCD
background. At this stage of the selection, the event samples are dominated by QCD
background. These distributions show agreement in shape between data and Monte-Carlo
simulation.
JHEP12(2010)060
5.3
Lepton isolation
The use of an isolation parameter to enhance the signal-to-background ratio was
inves-tigated. Separate isolation requirements must be considered for the electron and muon
channels, since the electron can undergo bremsstrahlung, while a muon is primarily
de-fined by its track.
A calorimeter-based isolation parameter defined as the total calorimeter transverse
energy in a cone of ∆R < 0.3 surrounding the candidate electron cluster, divided by the
cluster E
T, is considered for the electron channel. This variable is exploited for background
estimations in this channel, but is not used in the event selection.
In the muon analysis, a track-based isolation is defined using the sum of the transverse
momenta of tracks with p
T> 1 GeV in the inner detector within a cone of ∆R < 0.4 around
the muon track,
P p
IDT
. An isolation requirement of
P p
IDT/p
µT
< 0.2 is imposed in the muon
selection given that, after all other selections are made to identify W candidates, this
requirement rejects over 84% of the expected QCD background while keeping (98.4±1.0)%
of the signal events.
5.4
Kinematic selection
Additional requirements beyond those in sections
5.2
and
5.3
are imposed to better
discrim-inate W → `ν and Z → `` events from background events. A summary of all requirements
is as follows:
• An electron with E
T> 20 GeV or a combined muon with p
T> 20 GeV;
For the W → eν analysis, events containing an additional “medium” electron are
vetoed. If more than one combined muon candidate is reconstructed, the one with
the highest p
Tis chosen.
• Isolation for the muon channel:
P p
IDT
/p
µ T
< 0.2;
For the electron channel, no isolation criterion is used.
• For the W analysis only:
– Missing transverse energy E
Tmiss> 25 GeV;
– Transverse mass of the lepton-E
Tmisssystem, m
T> 40 GeV;
The transverse mass is defined as m
T=
q
2 p
`TE
Tmiss(1 − cos ∆φ), where ∆φ
is the azimuthal separation between the directions of the lepton and the missing
transverse energy.
• For the Z analysis only:
– A pair of oppositely-charged leptons (each lepton with p
T> 20 GeV) of the
same flavour;
– Invariant mass window of lepton pair: 66 < m
``< 116 GeV;
– Veto on events with three or more “medium” electrons (for the Z → ee analysis).
Figure
2
shows the E
Tmissdistributions of electron and muon candidates passing the
requirements described above, except the E
Tmissand m
Tcriteria. Both distributions indicate
JHEP12(2010)060
[GeV] T miss E 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 [GeV] T miss E 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 ATLAS -1 L dt = 315 nb∫
= 7 TeV ) s Data 2010 ( ν e → W QCD ν τ → W ee → Z τ τ → Z t t (a) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 [GeV] miss T E 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 = 7 TeV) s Data 2010 ( ν µ → W QCD ν τ → W µ µ → Z τ τ → Z t t ATLAS -1 L dt = 310 nb∫
(b)Figure 2. Distributions of the missing transverse energy, ETmiss, of electron (a) and muon (b) can-didates for data and Monte-Carlo simulation, broken down into the signal and various background components. The values of the integrated luminosities for the two channels have uncertainties of ±11%, see section3.
that applying a minimum requirement on E
Tmissgreatly enhances the W signal over the
expected background. True W → `ν events in the Monte Carlo are predominantly at high
E
Tmissdue to the escaping neutrino in the event. Although some of the QCD background
events may also have neutrinos in their final state, they mostly populate the regions of
small E
missT. Figures
3
and
4
show the m
Tdistributions without and with the requirement
of E
Tmiss> 25 GeV.
5.5
W and Z candidates after final selection
Table
2
summarises the number of W → `ν candidates remaining after each major
re-quirement in the respective analyses. A total of 1069 candidates (637 e
+and 432 e
−)
pass all requirements in the electron channel and 1181 candidates (710 µ
+and 471 µ
−) in
the muon channel. Figure
5
shows the electron cluster E
Tand muon combined p
Tof the
lepton candidates, while figure
6
shows the p
Tspectrum of the W → `ν candidates. Both
channels demonstrate a clear W signal over a small background.
Table
3
summarises the number of Z → `` candidates remaining after each major
requirement has been imposed.
A total of 70 candidates pass all requirements in the
electron channel and 109 candidates in the muon channel, within the invariant mass window
66 < m
``< 116 GeV. Figure
7
shows the electron cluster E
Tand muon combined p
Tof the
lepton candidates. The breakdown of the various background contributions are also shown
in this figure. Due to the small size of the backgrounds in both channels, backgrounds
are not shown in the subsequent distributions for the Z analysis. Figure
8
shows the p
Tspectrum of the Z → `` candidates. The invariant mass distribution of the lepton pairs is
presented in figure
9
. The observed resolution degradation in the muon data compared to
design expectations is currently under investigation. It has been taken into account in the
JHEP12(2010)060
[GeV] T m 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 [GeV] T m 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 ATLAS -1 L dt = 315 nb∫
= 7 TeV ) s Data 2010 ( ν e → W QCD ν τ → W ee → Z τ τ → Z t t (a) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 [GeV] T m 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 = 7 TeV) s Data 2010 ( ν µ → W QCD ν τ → W µ µ → Z τ τ → Z t t ATLAS -1 L dt = 310 nb∫
(b)Figure 3. Distributions of the transverse mass, mT, of the electron-EmissT system (a) and muon-Emiss
T system (b) without an ETmissrequirement. The data are compared to Monte-Carlo simulation, broken down into the signal and various background components. The values of the integrated luminosities for the two channels have uncertainties of ±11%, see section3.
[GeV] T m 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 [GeV] T m 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 = 7 TeV ) s Data 2010 ( ν e → W QCD ν τ → W t t ee → Z τ τ → Z ATLAS -1 L dt = 315 nb
∫
(a) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 [GeV] T m 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 = 7 TeV) s Data 2010 ( ν µ → W QCD ν τ → W µ µ → Z τ τ → Z t t ATLAS -1 L dt = 310 nb∫
(b)Figure 4. Distributions of the transverse mass, mT, of the electron-Emiss
T system (a) and muon-ETmiss system (b) with a requirement of ETmiss > 25 GeV. The data are compared to Monte-Carlo simulation, broken down into the signal and various background components. The values of the integrated luminosities for the two channels have uncertainties of ±11%, see section3.
JHEP12(2010)060
Requirement
Number of candidates
W → eν
W → µν
Trigger
6.5 × 10
65.1 × 10
6Lepton: e with E
T> 20 GeV or µ with p
T> 20 GeV
4003
7052
Muon isolation:
P p
ID T/p
µ T< 0.2
—
2920
E
Tmiss> 25 GeV
1116
1220
m
T> 40 GeV
1069
1181
Table 2. Number of W → eν and W → µν candidates in data, remaining after each major requirement. [GeV] T E 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Entries / 2.5 GeV 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 [GeV] T E 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Entries / 2.5 GeV 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 ATLAS -1 L dt = 315 nb
∫
= 7 TeV ) s Data 2010 ( ν e → W QCD ν τ → W ee → Z τ τ → Z t t (a) 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 [GeV] T p 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Entries / 2.5 GeV 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Data 2010 (s = 7 TeV) ν µ → W QCD ν τ → W µ µ → Z τ τ → Z t t ATLAS -1 L dt = 310 nb∫
(b)Figure 5. Distributions of the electron cluster ET (a) and muon pT (b) of the W candidates after final selection. The requirements of Emiss
T > 25 GeV and mT > 40 GeV are applied. The data are compared to Monte-Carlo simulation, broken down into the signal and various background components. The values of the integrated luminosities for the two channels have uncertainties of ±11%, see section3.
Requirement
Number of candidates
Z → ee
Z → µµ
Trigger
6.5 × 10
65.1 × 10
6Two leptons (ee or µµ with E
T(p
T) >20 GeV)
83
144
Muon isolation:
P p
IDT
/p
µ
T
< 0.2
—
117
Opposite charge ee or µµ pair:
78
117
66 < m
``< 116 GeV
70
109
Table 3. Number of Z → ee and Z → µµ candidates in data, remaining after each major requirement.
JHEP12(2010)060
[GeV] T W p 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Entries / 2.5 GeV 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 [GeV] T W p 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Entries / 2.5 GeV 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Data 2010 ( s = 7 TeV ) ν e → W QCD ν τ → W ee → Z τ τ → Z t t ATLAS -1 L dt = 315 nb∫
(a) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 [GeV] W T p 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Entries / 2.5 GeV 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Data 2010 (s = 7 TeV) ν µ → W QCD ν τ → W µ µ → Z τ τ → Z t t ATLAS -1 L dt = 310 nb∫
(b)Figure 6. Distributions of the transverse momentum pT of the W candidates in the electron channel (a) and muon channel (b) after final selection. The requirements of Emiss
T > 25 GeV and mT > 40 GeV are applied. The data are compared to Monte-Carlo simulation, broken down into the signal and various background components. The values of the integrated luminosities for the two channels have uncertainties of ±11%, see section3.
[GeV] T E 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110120 Entries / 5 GeV -2 10 -1 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 = 7 TeV) s Data 2010 ( ee → Z QCD τ τ → Z ν e → W t t ATLAS -1 L dt=316 nb
∫
[GeV] T E 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110120 Entries / 5 GeV -2 10 -1 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 (a) 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 -3 10 -2 10 -1 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 -3 10 -2 10 -1 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 [GeV] T p 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Entries / 5 GeV -3 10 -2 10 -1 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 -1 L dt = 331 nb∫
ATLAS Data 2010 ( s=7 TeV)
µ µ → Z t t τ τ → Z QCD ν µ → W (b)
Figure 7. Distributions of the electron cluster ET(a) and muon pT(b) of the Z candidate leptons after final selection. The data are compared to Monte-Carlo simulation, broken down into the signal and various background components. The values of the integrated luminosities for the two channels have uncertainties of ±11%, see section3.
JHEP12(2010)060
[GeV] Z T p 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 0 5 10 15 20 25 = 7 TeV) s Data 2010 ( ee → Z ATLAS -1 L dt=316 nb∫
[GeV] Z T p 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 0 5 10 15 20 25 (a) [GeV] Z T p 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 [GeV] Z T p 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Entries / 5 GeV 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 -1 L dt = 331 nb∫
ATLAS =7 TeV) s Data 2010 ( µ µ → Z (b)Figure 8. Distributions of the transverse momentum pT of the Z candidates in the electron channel (a) and muon channel (b) after final selection. The data are compared to the expectations from Monte-Carlo simulation. The values of the integrated luminosities for the two channels have uncertainties of ±11%, see section3.
[GeV] ee m 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Entries / 5 GeV 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 = 7 TeV) s Data 2010 ( ee → Z ATLAS -1 L dt=316 nb
∫
[GeV] ee m 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Entries / 5 GeV 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 (a) [GeV] µ µ m 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Entries / 5 GeV 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 -1 L dt = 331 nb∫
ATLAS =7 TeV) s Data 2010 ( µ µ → Z (b)Figure 9. Distributions of the invariant mass m``of Z candidates in the electron (a) and muon (b) channels. The data are compared to the expectations from Monte-Carlo simulation. The values of the integrated luminosities for the two channels have uncertainties of ±11%, see section3.
JHEP12(2010)060
6
W and Z boson signals and backgrounds
In this section, estimates of the various background components in the W and Z-candidate
samples, and background-subtracted signal numbers, are presented. Except for the Z → µµ
final state, the QCD components of the backgrounds were estimated from the data. The
electroweak and tt components were obtained for all channels from Monte-Carlo simulation.
6.1
Background estimate for the W → eν channel
The expected contributions from the W → τ ν, Z → ee and Z → τ τ processes were
estimated to be 25.9, 1.9, and 1.6 events, respectively, while from tt production 4.1 events
are expected.
The QCD background was estimated using the distribution of the missing transverse
energy E
Tmissas measured in data. Events were selected by applying all cuts used in the
W selection, except the E
Tmisscut at 25 GeV. The resulting distribution is displayed in
figure
10
. The signal and background components in this sample were obtained from a
binned maximum likelihood template fit. The shapes of the W → eν signal and of the
dominant W → τ ν background were taken from Monte-Carlo simulation, whereas the
shape of the QCD background was determined from data.
The background template was obtained by using the W selection, but modifying the
electron identification requirements, such that the sample is dominated by background. In
the template selection, the background electron candidate is required to pass the “loose”
identification requirements and the track quality requirements from the “medium” electron
identification. It is, however, required to fail at least one of the remaining “medium” or
“tight” requirements. No requirements to reject conversions (see section
4.2
) were applied.
In order to suppress the residual contribution from W → eν signal events and to obtain
an essentially signal-free sample, isolated candidates were rejected, by applying a cut on
the calorimeter-based isolation variable, as described in section
5.3
. Using a high-statistics
QCD-dijet Monte-Carlo sample, it was verified that these requirements produce a
back-ground template similar in shape to the backback-ground expected from the W selection. The
result of the fit to the data is shown in figure
10
. It provides a background estimate in the
signal region (E
Tmiss> 25 GeV) of N
QCD= 28.0 ± 3.0(stat) events, where the uncertainty
contains the statistical uncertainty of the data and of the templates. This estimate is used
in the extraction of the cross section in section
7
.
To estimate the systematic uncertainty, the shape of the background template was
varied by applying different event selection criteria, in particular by varying isolation cuts.
In addition, two extreme ranges in E
Tmiss(0–25 GeV and 15–100 GeV) were considered as
fit ranges. Based on these studies, the systematic uncertainty on the QCD background was
estimated to be ± 10 events.
As an alternative estimate, the calorimeter isolation variable,
P
∆R<0.3i
E
Ti/E
T, as
defined in section
5.3
, was used as discriminating variable. Due to the limited statistics and
the few background events, the fit was performed after applying the “loose” instead of the
“tight” electron identification, while the requirements on E
Tmissand m
Twere kept. Using
JHEP12(2010)060
[GeV] miss T E 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Entries / 5 GeV 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 ATLAS -1 L dt =315 nb∫
= 7 TeV) s Data 2010 ( ν τ → + W ν e → W QCD (data template) [GeV] miss T E 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Entries / 5 GeV 0 50 100 150 200 250 300Figure 10. The distribution of Emiss
T after applying all W selection cuts, except the ETmisscut. The data are shown together with the results of a template fit for signal (including the dominant W → τ ν electroweak background contribution) and the QCD background. The dashed line indicates the cut on Emiss
T , as applied in the W analysis. The uncertainty of the integrated luminosity is ±11%, see section3.